Which Fundamental Interaction Causes Degeneracy Pressure?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of degeneracy pressure in fermions and its relation to the four fundamental interactions in physics. The original poster questions which fundamental interaction is responsible for degeneracy pressure, particularly in the context of stellar environments.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between degeneracy pressure and the Pauli exclusion principle, questioning how this fits within the framework of the Standard Model. There are discussions about the nature of forces involved, particularly in stellar contexts, and whether degeneracy pressure can be attributed to specific fundamental interactions.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the concepts, offering differing perspectives on the nature of degeneracy pressure and its relation to fundamental forces. Some suggest that degeneracy pressure is independent of the specific interactions causing compression, while others argue for the relevance of electromagnetic forces in the context of fermions.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing debate about the role of gravity and other forces in the context of degeneracy pressure, with some participants noting the importance of understanding the underlying assumptions about the nature of the forces at play.

loom91
Messages
404
Reaction score
0
I was wondering something, a collection of fermions can resist compressing forces due to what is termed degeneracy pressure. I was wondering, which of the four fundamental interactions is this due to? Thanks.

Molu
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To my knowledge, this is due to the Pauli exclusion principle, and not to force interaction between the electrons.
 
as gendou2 said it's to do with Pauli exclusion, since

\Delta{x}\Delta{p}\geq\frac{\hbar}{2}

when a material is compressed (such as the interior of a star under the effect of gravity) the uncertainty in x gets smaller, leading to less uncertainty in momentum. The fermions are called degenerate when the pressure due to this momentum equals or exceeds(?) the pressure due to the fermions thermal motion. So in a sense it's due to whatever of the fundamental forces is causing the compression, mainly gravity in a stellar core - which is what this problem is usually used for I think, although I'm sure it must be quite important in studying fusion.
 
jbunten said:
as gendou2 said it's to do with Pauli exclusion, since

\Delta{x}\Delta{p}\geq\frac{\hbar}{2}

when a material is compressed (such as the interior of a star under the effect of gravity) the uncertainty in x gets smaller, leading to less uncertainty in momentum. The fermions are called degenerate when the pressure due to this momentum equals or exceeds(?) the pressure due to the fermions thermal motion. So in a sense it's due to whatever of the fundamental forces is causing the compression, mainly gravity in a stellar core - which is what this problem is usually used for I think, although I'm sure it must be quite important in studying fusion.

I understand that it's due to Pauli's exclusion principle. But how does that fit in with the Standard Model, where all forces can be classified as due to one of the four fundamental interactions? I mean, if a star is resisting a compressive force, that means an opposite force is acting. To which interaction can we attribute that force?

Molu
 
The 'force' is called 'degeneracy pressure'. As you probably know the fermions are excluded from occupying the same state, so they need a fixed number of states to exist in. As the star contracts the energy gap between those states increases, so the energy of the fermion population has to grow. And that increase is just due to the shrinking geometry they are confined to (as in the square well). So even if you could find a type of fermion that experienced no standard model interactions whatsoever and managed to confine them somehow, they would still exert this same 'pressure'.
 
loom91 said:
I was wondering something, a collection of fermions can resist compressing forces due to what is termed degeneracy pressure. I was wondering, which of the four fundamental interactions is this due to? Thanks.

Molu

The actual pressure is due to the usual forces of the Standard Model (In actuality, it will be mostly the electromagnetic force). If you put the fermions in a container at near zero temperature and you compress the container, the actual pressure exerted by the fermions on the box is simply the electromagnetic force between the fermions and the particles in the box. The reason resist compression is the degeneracy pressure but the actual force they exter on the container is electromagnetic (electric for the most part).

It's not much different from heat pressure. The pressure is due to thermal agitation but thermal agitation is not a force. The actual pressure is due to the "collision" between the particles in the box and the container. But the collision occurs because of the electromagnetic force between the particles.


At least, that's the way I think about it.
 
You may think about it that way, but I don't think that's correct. Neutral fermions (like neutrinos) would exhibit the same degeneracy pressure. Are you going to say that's because of the weak force? Really, there is no interaction term necessary to compute it. You are right in that you need a force to confine them to begin with, but in this case that's gravity. And degeneracy pressure opposes gravity.
 
Last edited:
So the degeneracy pressure is to be considered a characteristic of the interaction that is causing the compression?

Molu
 
As it is independent of the nature of the force causing the compression, I'd have a hard time think of it like that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K